Cool, thats what I thought. Sometimes, i wish i could inherit from a class, but then i just use proxy to do it instead :) For example, i made a function which acted like a fn? , but had some metadata. At first i was going to use records, but couldnt because i needed to inherit from Afn, but proxies worked beautifully!
On Feb 13, 9:00 am, Stuart Sierra <the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe there are some technical issues with allowing re-definition of a > class that inherits from a concrete (non-interface) superclass, but I don't > know the details. > > However, it was mainly a design decision. Clojure is opinionated, and one > of its opinions is that concrete inheritance is bad. It leads to problems > like fragile base classes, and (in Java at least) it limits you to a single > inheritance hierarchy. Even some Java developers will even tell you to use > inheritance only from interfaces, and put shared code into static methods > elsewhere. > > -Stuart Sierra > clojure.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
